From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: RFC: NAT configuration over ctnetlink Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 19:10:05 +0200 Message-ID: <4457926D.5010209@trash.net> References: <4451BA40.4050207@trash.net> <445388B9.2010308@netfilter.org> <4457677D.7060607@trash.net> <44578E0C.5070705@netfilter.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Harald Welte , Netfilter Development Mailinglist Return-path: To: Pablo Neira Ayuso In-Reply-To: <44578E0C.5070705@netfilter.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: >> I don't know. I would prefer to just remove it. Since the library >> takes all parameters as arguments to a single function (one more >> thing I definitely don't like), compatibility of the library will >> break anyway when we add support for multiple manips. Do you really >> think its worth keeping around? > > > Not really, if it's trash better remove this sooner than later. Now that > we are going to break backward compatibility, please let me know if you > don't like anything else that we could change at this point. One thing that would make a lot of sense is to change or introduce a new interface in libnetfilter_conntrack that allows to add netfilter attributes to a conntrack "object" one at a time, so we don't have to change function prototypes each time we're introducing something new.